From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f46.google.com (mail-wm0-f46.google.com [74.125.82.46]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A8AA3777 for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 10:43:05 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f46.google.com with SMTP id g23so155048071wme.1 for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 01:43:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GmLh1FiZkye9w/CwHvq2yRyk2Hmd6iou1RBKRjmCOX4=; b=iUMwwSDrmBWx/RREbzR61Fd+F8fjtnkElzdwzb8XmEN6Plbg8MDbu2+Q+QRnKKfoDA 9nNOzrfFNrSVma3GfCLF69Kcfo4dqb8B/br7Hbl/8Xu/0WPUAjGM9klL6bzAlr4c8SGY rSe4QK6PaZC/mknJhkVJ5RmNwNTlhXjQ9RGncyJEpsAawKJzwPWfKGiFa1RYZX/vxqMW tWEIHGP9Lq1JFrM7BuX9NJDJICdmwdo4FC5sa3PyFdB8xykOSEz2cNEl1PwQWvUuMdbT VlDnII2cY0Am4pznnUxOJmpv9t4oNEuEIHHZInMRg3/WTb5zsegjRdyAW4O8nQ3O18vX GNpA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GmLh1FiZkye9w/CwHvq2yRyk2Hmd6iou1RBKRjmCOX4=; b=Lm0nvYntN7zmAMnfxiJe+SHFbAJoamIFNwRUa2R84v2rOyirpm8AB9Lg4xcZ4IC3k2 2Qvn4Shhr6F40NZHp8Qc6U5HAmRV/mIwyXylD+8ro8w49kKZalB13NqnF1OjBpKWs4A+ 7+YYa4793Q5LLrLJnTQ5q2dYK1qbLtVuLUo6rrRCN24lG4IBhPeluC+29q1RMy8V0xyI 9cmpmvKAgxeI1bFtFl/FaAgNncS3XNvtb5fawx0VuBmUIVlwK40SKaQPLY6nv1RHYV4/ /PBCdIQ+Q4bV0Lr7O3p78tAxLWXWMPRlUZ4dPBLyXwxT0RBj3e1G88gzCbQe5PiHOGPu 8YdA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvd39XGWyAg4YL7EdjaS8ca+XE3hqcfXmpj8E5NGe1H741BynwWPAj319GPexp98p9Oq X-Received: by 10.28.127.14 with SMTP id a14mr2476599wmd.80.1479202984699; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 01:43:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m5sm3208077wmd.17.2016.11.15.01.43.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 15 Nov 2016 01:43:03 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Xu, Qian Q" Cc: ci@dpdk.org Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 10:43:03 +0100 Message-ID: <2266496.1mGR1HsFcg@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <82F45D86ADE5454A95A89742C8D1410E39258B31@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <82F45D86ADE5454A95A89742C8D1410E39258B31@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] Could we have some agreements on the CI then discuss the opens X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 09:43:05 -0000 Hi, 2016-11-15 09:07, Xu, Qian Q: > Hi, all > I just think that if we can have some agreements on the DPDK CI tasks firstly, then discuss about the open list. Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. > Possible agreement parts: > > 1. Schedule tool: Jenkins. > LF has the Jenkins as the schedule tool. So I wonder if all agree on this schedule tool for scheduling build and regression test. The schedule tool must be a personal choice for each test instance. Are you talking about the reference lab? > 2. Create per patch check(patchcheck and build) by using Jenkins to trigger > For each patch check, currently we cover the Patchcheck and build. > I noticed Thomas has a separate mail about checkpatch, so does it mean we can remove patchcheck from the build test? Yes The email checkpatch@dpdk.org is the address of this test instance. If you send a patch directly to this instance, you will receive a private report. It could be a good idea to do the same at Intel so we can test the compilation, especially with ICC, before sending a public patch. And this feature should be documented somewhere. > For build test, Intel can provide Intel IA based per patch build report. If there is common format, we can follow it. Now that the release 16.11 is done, I'll work on sharing some scripts. > 3. Create daily or weekly functional/build regression test based on git tree, also using Jenkins to trigger > For the functional/build regression tests, Intel has already sent out the daily build and functional regression test. If there is common format, we can also follow it. > Besides Intel, I have also seen the IBM's daily build report. Any others want to publish the daily/weekly functional regression tests? > > Opens: > > 1. Centralized or distributed performance lab. Is the decision more dependent on budget or the thoughts? Anyway the per-patch checks will be distributed and aggregated in patchwork. If we build a reference lab inside Linux Foundation, it will be part of the distributed CI. So your question should be: Are we going to have a budget for a reference lab? Which tests will be run in this CI instance? > 2. Performance report center. Do you want to publish the performance report and which is the preferred format? > > 3. The code review tool is still by mailing list. Is it the final decision? > > 4. How about the central bug system? Do we want to have one? +1, I commit to have a central bug tracking on dpdk.org during December. > Proposal: Could we have a CI weekly sync-up meeting for discussion only on CI? If most people on the mailing list from EU and PRC, then we could find a more friendly time for PRC people. If interested people are Chinese and French, it would be a good idea to have an IRC meeting.